tv Washington Journal CSPAN April 8, 2014 7:00am-10:01am EDT
by senator john barrasso to discuss health and energy cares. you can join the conversation on facebook and twitter. ♪ its the washington journal for april 8. the busy day on the hill. secretary kerry before the senate foreign relations committee at 10:00 eastern on also, several senate democratic women scheduled to take the senate floor today to discuss gender pay equality. scheduledok for that at 2:15 this afternoon.
this for the first 45 minutes. if you want to reach out on the phone, the numbers are on the screen. you to send us a tweet or e-mail , and you can recharge us on facebook, as well. post has aton breakdown of the vote from yesterday. by the numbers, it says it is a vote of 61-38 that invoke cloture on the legislation.
again, some of the comments this morning on facebook. we will read tweets as we go along this morning. us on theso talk to phone. the phone lines will be on the screen. bonnie from oak park, michigan, on a democrats line. you are up first. why are they allowing the scl's to ride on their yachts? we are struggling every day to make ends meet while you have a ceo in luxury? william from salute oh, south carolina. good morning.
lost my job in 2011. my jobs shipped overseas. i've vote middle of the road. what the republicans did this time, letting it expire in , the job market is terrible. you haven't worked for a while, jobs or even look at you. i would saying is, never vote republican again. thank you. herbert on our republican line from camilla, georgia. caller: we send money to other
countries. where is the conscience of america? i'm a military man. i fought in the war. my daughter fought in iraq. she does not have a job. the conscious of america has to come back. we had people take $400 million for the elections. show your people some love and consideration. the conscience of america is gone. these are human beings. we see dogs with insurance, but we don't see people with insurance. we have to stop living this kind of way. we are not second class citizens. the people spoke when they voted for obama. mitt romney was a corporate man.
people come together, they not declassified a second rate citizens in the united states. we'll hear from senator to dan coats. he is a senator from indiana. he's talking about long-term unemployment benefits. thatve repeatedly said senate should have a full and open debate on this important issue. that debate should include the opportunity for those of us in the minority, and perhaps those in the majority, to offer amendments, changes that would, in their view, represent their people's view that they represent here in the congress. these are amendments that could be stricken from the bill. they can make them better, something that the house would consider. clearly, for those truly in need, for those who have played the issue of
extended unemployment is a legitimate issue for debate. have worked with not only my colleagues here in the republican side of the aisle, but also with my democratic colleagues. thingsd to secure two that would give me a better sense of where we are going. i think they would provide for better legislation that kurt -- that could perhaps work its way through the congress. if we can't offset new spending, with spending on programs that have not proven their worth, we will continue to spend more than we take in and continue to add char national debt. tread down theto precipitous road to federal crisis.
those provisions lost last december. we are getting a thoughts on it as you go throughout the morning. harold is from our independent line. harold, good morning. caller: hello? boehner and these republicans have been acting almost like terrorists on the subject. the house of excuses or they won't even bring it to vote or talk about it. one of the issues they have is about adding some job creation measures to it. when you think about that? outer: john boehner came and said he has no problem giving extending unemployment as long as its paid for. then he comes out and starts people.ling
this is nothing to do with creating private sector jobs. lying and doesn't even want to face the fact to talk about it. he went back on his word when he said as long as it was paid for that they would bring it up. now he is just, but excuses again that's all. host: we will hear from james in fort lauderdale, florida. extending unemployment seems like it is the only answer . i think we have the right leadership in our country, because what we always talking about. we're talking about minimum wage and extending unemployment. nobody speaks about a vision for
america, like in manufacturing are upgrading our own energy. it is always about expanding government, which creates inflation. complain thatd they can make ends meet, everything is getting so expensive. the government is a reason why things are getting so expensive, because her craving inflation. they're devaluing the dollar. the more government we have, the cornered.esses are at the price of gas today. nobody speaking about that. so when it comes to extendinges, if not aske the benefits, what should be done? caller: i think we are overtaxed and overregulated. can't compete in the world with the unions.
loser, but iure think mitt romney had the answers. he was a visionary. i think he would've been a true leader. to go back and read some of his speeches and some of the visions , he was tying to explain to american people about government was harming a country. it is almost a the point where it is pathetic. we are talking about $30 an hour were talking about minimum wage and unemployment. facebook, anthony gilliard says
we have added a line for those of you unemployed. caller from pennsylvania. hello. hi, it seems every time i get laid off from work, it is seasonal, they put me on extension. host: 20 think about this idea about the senate vote and what could happen in the house? you have to make 49.5% in your high court and the other three quarters. that is hard to do when you work
seasonally. the three quarters in pennsylvania its nose. it is raining, you can't work. do you work construction? how do you manage when you're not working? caller: in the past, unemployment has helped. thank out after money saved. i have been able to take care my bills. that money has run out. now things are getting tough. i think they need to extend the benefits. david.hat was we set aside a line for those of you unemployed. you heard from senator dan coats, the republican from indiana earlier on this topic. senator carl levin on passage of the bill and his thoughts on it. here he is. >> this is an important victory.
i wish it had come much sooner. sooner for the 80,000 michigan michiganians. these benefits keep food on the table and a roof over the head for people affected by job loss to no fault of their own. the idea that some of our colleagues have advanced, that unemployment insurance gives workers an excuse not to find a job, is as inaccurate as it is insulting. for all but a handful of recipients, unemployment benefits are not a free pass from working. the economic lifeline that keeps them going while searching for the job they so desperately want and need. i want to commend senators on both sides of the aisle who have not given up on this issue, and who have worked so hard to forge a compromise.
they're led by senators jack reed and dean heller. republicans have joined with democrats on the procedural votes necessary to move this , and i hope the bipartisan support for this measure in the senate will from speaker boehner to bring it to a vote in the house. host: james describes himself as he is from southeast massachusetts. i've been looking for job since benefits ran out. repossessed, my houses for sale. i am a hard-working person. ince the benefits ran out have been looking. i have three kids. i'm struggling very hard just to try to make it. i had put myself on welfare.
boehner hader passed it on. what type of work are you r? king for lack of caller caller: i'm an electrical engineer. i've been laid off for almost a year. that is the reason why. persons who want have been unemployed for almost a year and a half. host: several events on jobs and wages taking place on capitol hill. there's an article in "usa today."
several senate democratic leaders will take to the senate floor on 2:15 to talk about the pay wage gap. this is highlighted in a story in "the new york times." the headline says of mr. obama spotlights the gender gap in wages. it also adds this factoid from the study for the senate for american women in politics. up 35% that women make
of the president's cabinet, although it is one of the highest proportions ever, it is down from the level of the clinton administration. then, one more thing to show you from "the wall street journal" this morning. this is a rebuttal of the idea from two gentlemen from the american enterprise institute. -- headline
the senate passing an extension bill for unemployment benefits. those benefits running out as of last december, which would extend past with the state offers. are getting your thoughts on that this morning. dave from son barry pennsylvania sunberry, pennsylvania. caller: i worked almost all of last year, partially as a subcontractor in the beginning of the year. i was lucky enough to land -- to land a really good job doing construction work, which pays really well. unfortunately, it is seasonal.
the thing is, i worked all of last year, i pay taxes on all the money, which i paid a lot of that, and i simply think unfortunately, i got laid off and iy through december had to spend the entire winter not been able to take care my family. sending this money overseas instead of taking care of their own people. here's michelle from american republican line. i do agree with that caller a few minutes ago about how make rodney had the vision for america. we would be in such a better place right now. another thing i want to say, and it is so hard that people just take it the wrong way when you make comments, but i feel that
unfortunately welfare and unemployment have become a way of life for people. yes, there are some people on welfare and unemployment that needed. i would certainly hope that that money would be there for me when i'm down and out. the problem is, there are so many people that use it as a way of life. i personally know people that way. i know it is happening. that, thet because of middle class is getting sucked dry. i went back to school and my studies for work. we can't do anything anymore, everything is so expensive. there's a gentleman he talked about the race of inflation. . have three small children we are getting sucked dry. i feel this whole country is .ecoming poverty ridden they're getting with the middle class because we're the ones
just trying to get by to support everybody else. when back in the day everyone would work. it didn't matter what it was whether it was fast food or standing holding a sign. i feel we have lost our sense of pity. people are going to sit back and take the money until runs out and then maybe we'll get something. i'm sorry to be so blunt about it, but personally, my husband and i and our family are suffering now because of all the money that i feel is just getting sucked out of her paychecks. you thisets for morning. this worst run from kevin brady talking about unemployment.
host: you can send us e-mails, too. much like all is send us an again, one of the many ways you can reach out to us if you want to talk to us about this issue. amy from texas on independent line, good morning. caller: i agree with the lady who called a few minutes ago completely. amanda called and said he was a carpenter, seasonal work, teachers are seasonal, to. thereafter unemployment during the summer. my husband has worked , andruction for 30 years there are downtimes between jobs. you know is coming, it is not a surprise.
you findother work, small side jobs. a little here and a little there. every time when we both worked two and three jobs, it seems like -- i know there a lot of people who work really hard, but anymore, its like i can't find a job, come take care of me. my husband told me, times people have come into the work trailer andfill that an application said no, i just need you to signs from employment. i wanted job. as two or three times a week. that is when people's sympathy is wearing very thin. i know mine is. that is amy from texas. front pagesk on the
i work construction for 30 years. as of 2007, i made approximately $65,000. i don't think i made that much on the books since. there's no more work out there. news google calling and think we want to be unemployed. job after 2007 was 2009. i was making $10 an hour. i moved up from that shop to $13 an hour. i got another construction job, worked six months and now i am laid off again. now i am back in school trying to get a cdl to be a truck driver. is it ministration has had six years and have not created any just forrtunities, not construction workers, but for other people. i don't know when this is going to change, but we do want to be on unemployment. we're forced to be on unemployment. host: the me ask you why you chose to get training in truck g? ving echo caller:
arealler: it seems there more job opportunities there. if i look for jobs in my field there is not enough pay. old, my career, i don't know what else to do now. this is michael from alabama. he is on our independent line. i have sympathy for people who are unemployed and need benefits, but come on, man. when is enough enough? how many times jack extender stuff. i was an ac technician for years. came, i got out and did other things to support my family.
advanced metallic or -- vance mcallister making a statement yesterday. the video shows the incident leading up to the story in the papers today. eric, decatur, georgia, democrats line. greetings, and good morning to america. my opinion about the whole thing , the guy who wrote the budget that ran for vice president, his name? host: paul ryan. caller: bit of a hypocrite. to tear down safety nets while he receives
child and a college student. .ne of his parents passed away this is the same person that doesn't want to extend unemployment. the thing is that most of the people here in america are christians. they come from that way of thinking. when it goes to senate vote as of yesterday, what do you think about it? how did the vote go? the senate vote past, right? so, here comes the house.
just one more thing. we are going to be sitting as a the situation is should just work with the president. he sent job bill after job bill up there. host: john, welcome. would like to talk to people who call and say they know somebody who uses unemployment who doesn't want a job. i think they're confusing one or two anomalies with policy. doesn't change because one person uses or abuses the situation. should turned we on the and and -- internet
because our child predators online. we need to focus on what is a true factor for causing some of our unemployment. a society where everybody says oh, good parch up here or part time job there. that is not america. many good full-time, middle-class jobs. i see the problem as to front. on both sides, democrats and republicans have a serious issue. ofocrats seem to be in favor immigration on all fronts, especially for high skilled labor like h-1b. so-called free-trade policies that they uniformly support. two actors in general, americans in unison are in the majority.
republicans and democrats are against our so-called free trade policy. the panings like pacific partnership. unfortunately, everyone in washington seems to say well, that is not economic reality. every american his live through our trade difficulties will see that is why. host: this is gary from twitter. many comments being made on the senate vote that was taken yesterday. a story about al sharpton this morning in the pages of the new york times. story, from james behring, goes on to say that the reverend al sharpton was an informer
on the line. i think on today's topic you should all look at the public assistance programs for the rich. written by nicholas kristof from the new york times. this will reveal a hell of a lot of information on who is getting what and who's getting shafted. cori up next in newark, ohio, republican line. i was calling about the unemployment. i really think that the whole political system, they are in election mode or the democrats are putting this up because in the house is not going to pass. am pretty much fed up with both sides for not getting anything accomplished. i think what the republican goal is is to find a solution. that is why boehner is looking
it instead of just extending , to find some way to create more jobs, to create incentives for people to get out there. i think the entitlements and the government have gotten out of that it isthe point consuming 75% of our budget. they're talking about spending cuts and things like that. 75% of our budget is are spoken for in entitlements. we have to stop the trend or we will never get back to a positive place in our government and our country. marlene up next heard she is from new jersey, independent line. listen, i'm 70 years old. i want to say something to the american people. dirty, 40he last years, we control our immigration. john f. kennedy himself to not
believe more than hundred 50,000 people should be a will to emigrate here., changed all face of america. we have 22-30,000,000 illegal immigrants on top of illegal immigrants. it is no way they could possibly ever create enough jobs to satisfy people. i believe it is time for americans to tell those representatives, american citizens first. that is one of the many commenting this morning on the senate passing a bill yesterday
that would extend unemployment benefits. the bill numbers to the house. we are your comments on it. stores in the usa today this morning takes look at voting itself, as far as waiting in line to vote third uses is research done by the pew charitable trusts election initiative. the report says that waiting lines get shorter. in 2008, assignment states are doing a better job at running elections. we get some of the details from individual states, adding that average weight chemicals inched down about three minutes, from more than 14 minutes in 2008 to just over 11 minutes in 2012, south carolina, which had weights of more than one hour in 2008, code is signed by about 25 minutes. florida's winning time was the worst. at 45 minutes, it was far longer than the 29 minutes voters waited in 2008. patricia from baltimore maryland, democrats line.
good morning. i take offense that people say people on unemployment are not looking for jobs. we are looking for jobs. i've been unemployed since may of 2013. for jobs and make less money, but they don't call you because her friend as soon as you get a job making decent money you're going to leave. what are you supposed to do? host: what time over. talking about? caller: customer service. host: did you collect unemployment money into the run out? caller: yes. thatad of them cutting off -- instead of them cutting off the long term people, they cut out the glitches started.
because i am out of work, also. i have been working all of my bye. i'm pretty disturbed one of your callers, who was a teacher. about -- she was commenting about her husband working on construction. that she would be looking for job. what i would like to say to her, they would be kicking it all the time for extra money. she thinks they are located employees also. you need to think before they speak. that is all have to say. thank you very much. brooklyn, new york, unemployed.
go ahead. caller: i wasn't too lazy to go to vietnam. -- whato know what is is wrong with building bridges in the infrastructure in america. you -- they don't tell you that those policies that . re cut, host: back to unemployment. talk about that. sherman -- city in the insurance policies are crazy and cut jobs. what is wrong with building an infrastructure. why do you think
infrastructure is a solution? ? why do you think it is a solution? republicans want to build infrastructure so they can get credit for it. ou understand? host on set record straight on unemployment extension which should be passed by the house. insurance, it is not welfare. we as workers are now laid off. we paid into the system. most states cover the first 26 weeks, and then the tier one, tier two programs can on the federal program for those of us that can't find work, such as myself.
we look and look. there is -- there are just no jobs out there. we need to pay our bills. it is insurance, it is not welfare, and i'm voting democrat across the board. i've been voting independent and republican. i've had it with republicans. i'm voting democrat across the board. i hope the rest of the country does, too. that is bill. this will be the last caller on the topic. representative tim ryan will join us first talk about the federal budget. this is a democrats unveiled a budget, yesterday. brosseau -- bar washington journal,
first, i want to say to the new speaker that jane gephardt and i would like to invite him and his --e jean to our contractual our congressional district of missouri. i hope that in the days ahead that janine and i can come to your congressional district in illinois. c-span, created by america's cable companies 35 years ago and brought to today as a public service by your local cable or satellite provider. c-span, for 35 years bringing public affairs events from washington directly to you. putting utrecht in the room at congressional hearings, when us events, briefings and conferences. offering complete gavel-to-gavel coverage of the u.s. house, all us a public service a private industry. we are c-span, created by the cable tv industry 35 years ago and brought tears a public service by a local cable or
satellite provider. watch us in hd, like us on facebook and follow us on twitter. "washington journal" continues. host: our first guest this morning is "tim ryan." thanks for joining us. now, with the state passing the unemployment bill, where you see it going. i don't think this is something a speaker was take up, but if you can get any kind of compromise out of the senate, i think it would behoove us to at least have the speaker bring it to the floor, which i think would be smart. i think democrats would put up the number of votes to help pass it. the compromise seems to center on job creation issues. think of focus has to be
on job creation. republicans have failed to put anything forward in the past couple of decades. in their own philosophy on how to create jobs and the economy. there is a balance between ,overnment investments, taxes and other strategies that the republicans seem to think we can get there with george bush strategy. it really didn't work out. they had opportunity to implement their philosophies of supply-side economics. they did it when bush came in and they control both chambers for a while. it didn't create jobs. i think we have to go back to clinton nominee's, words that delicate balance between taxes and sports and whatnot. when the republicans bring up issues like job creation, you keystone line. deckers nowhere? you're talking but a very limited amount of job creation.
the trade-off is environment when you're talking about keystone. as so many other things going on the economy, whether it is additive manufacturing and three dimensional printing. for example, whether it is investment for clean energy. he sings are going to expand our economy. the economyent of is manufacturing and exporting. those things have a big ripple effect on the economy. when we invest in to clean energy, we're going to get a huge ripple effect because the is abouthe economy nine percent manufacturing. to me, that makes sense for us collectively to make those investments. that is not seen in the budget right now. house democrats unveiled a budget yesterday. in a nutshell, what does it do. you can bounce a budget in 10 , you can bounce it in five years.
the question is whether the sacrifices made on the way. it democratic budget we bounce a budget and the longest term, but we also make a key investments that are going to help grow the economy, which is going to help budget the economy. kids and parents can afford to send the kids to college. these are the kinds of things that ultimately grow the economy. that has really been the frustrating part here area and the simplicity approach that if we just cut cut cut, we are somehow going to grow the economy. that has not proven to work. it is not working in europe. yesterday budget is working. i think it is time except the fact that we can't let the tea party lead everyone else washington, d.c. around by the nose and continue down this path of an effective policies, and therefore stagnant job creation. crexendo pay for? >> you have to make some cuts. i'm not saying you don't, but
ultimately health care is a huge driver. i think we have to make more investments in preventative health care, wellness. i think that includes a food system, which publicized yet we need to talk more about. these huge subsidies equity huge agribusinesses that produce food that is making many americans say. regard have half the country in the next few years with either diabetes or prediabetes. this is not the talking washington, d.c.. if we recognize that our food system in the subsidies that go to big i are affecting the health of the american people and driving up health care costs , and we are not going to be able to get the budget on -- under control. those measures need to be made as well. the key here is growing the economy. you make strategic cuts. if the program is a dog, you get rid of it and you have to. ,, republican, we should not accept that programs that don't yield value for the taxpayer. host: program such as?
caller: there's a lot of waste in the military. we have to strategically. i don't think the sequester saying ok, were going to have these huge cuts across the board, is legal about it. you are taking pounds of flesh out of good programs and pounds of flesh out of that programs. we need to go through this methodically and just get rid of the bad programs and keep the good programs and make investments in good programs like that. i think the military provides a lot of opportunity, again, if you want to drive down costs, health, wellness a key component to doing that. if you really want to busted budget, let's have half the country have diabetes in the next 10 or 12 years, or the next 15 years. there's no way we could sustain medicare medicaid. private insurance would go through the roof because of the expensive cost of treating something like diabetes. those of the strategic investments. many have to grow the economy. investments in clean energy,
investments and nih, advancements in the national science foundation. whaterships like what like the president is trying to do at other locations. partnership and we now have huge companies in a place like youngstown, ohio. lockheed, boeing, raytheon. together and stimulating economic growth, cutting-edge research. just to show you how that helps, a few months ago, siemens corporation comes in and donates $440 million worth of software to youngstown state university to help create the workforce for the next added manufacturing renaissance that is going to happen, and probably happen in our region because of his institute. the republicans make no investments in these. the president is doing this all by executive order, when we know by the german model that these things work.
is what i'm talking about are you just can't cut taxes and hope everything works out. host: does the budget you put out depend on new or expanded taxes? caller: i don't believe so. isthis point, i think it just about balancing the budget. here is a thing. i think we need to ask the wealthiest. i think that is important. the top one percent income growth has been 277% since 1979. middle america, middle families, it has been more like 30%. it is not that anyone hates the rich, we have this budget problem, and we have to fix it. those to whom -- those to whom , we have destined for a little bit of help. the cuts we have to make can be deep, but we can stomach the strategic investments.
i think the democratic proposal is asking for a little bit from the wealthiest in our society so that we can continue to make these investments and grow the economy. host: in a nutshell, how you compare your budget with the republican budget? we make the strategic investments that ultimately are going to grow the economy and create jobs. help for average families who are struggling and tried to make ends meet. flights helping those people climb up the economic cuttings opposed to them off. i'll give you one example. in the republican budget, and the pell grant, the cut $90 billion out of the pell grant heard the cut 41 billion dollars out of the student loan program, and then they asked the student or the parents, where was getting the loan, to pay the
interest on the loan while they are still in school. that is already putting in another hurdle for people to try to afford it, in addition to that. if you're the school part time, you don't qualify for the program under the plan. so, if you're a single mom in youngstown ohio, or akron, ohio and you try to get your kid on school bus and go to work and maybe take a couple classes it can improve your lot, you won't qualify for the pell grant. is because we have to make republicans feel they have to make these huge cuts. to me that is foolish. help this woman, help these people try to get through school with the least amount of burden. the average student has a $29,000 loan now that they have to carry when they get out of school. tim ryan of ohio is our guest today.
you can always tweet us at wj. an whom -- it is giving. with theed congressional taxation system. no one has given me anything. i am the giver. givee.t a give the -- if the -- if you give to people, that is fine if they needed. people are working under the table and collecting a check. you have no idea. no one has no idea. isr percent of the country saying eight percent of the general revenue liability. i should givel me
more people to stimulate the economy. how about if i keep my money from taxation and i'd buy a car every three years. not see how that helps. class b respond to what you put out there. sure if you are in the top one percent or not but if someone is having a 77% , godase in their income bless them. we are rooting for you and we want you to create wealth and reinvest in the united states. we have a huge problem we are trying to deal with collectively. we cannot have anybody not contribute in some way, shape, or form. asking the top one percent were those people who benefit and have done very well in the last decade is -- decade or so to pay more so we can grow the pie and have customers for always myinesses and people in
pocket, i do not think that is too much to ask. a healthy and able-bodied american, you need to be out working. you need to get yourself educated and out into the workforce. you have responsibilities and we all do. it is not that somebody just wants to sit on their duff. it is fair to throw out broad characterizations of people that somehow if you cannot find work, au are somehow lazy and burden on society. many people are going out. we have job applications for decent jobs. we have steel mills coming into jobs beingth 400 created. we have thousands of applicants of people who want to go to work . we have call centers that go in and paid not great wages.
thousands of people are trying to go after those jobs. i see it every day in my district. is we're are not here to bankrupt anybody. we need to lower the tax rate to make sure it is competitive or we need to expend the research and development tax credit. got to ask we have those people who have done extremely well, not just the top one percent, but the top one percent of that one percent, and americans are not going to be able to get home without everybody chipping in. >> here is james, independent line, with representative jim ryan. caller: hello. if youbeen doing better guys would get the heck out of our business. and talk aboutp creating jobs. the only jobs the government
will create our government jobs. that means more taxes. you talk about being fair. there is nothing fair in your doctrines. you guys swear like drunken sailors. it is our money and not yours. if you really want to be fair, you would let him attack so everyone is paying something in. most americans are paying nothing in. them dopercentage of pay. why do you get to decide what is fair and not the people. you guys would start listening to what we had to say, you're supposed to represent us, and that of trying to cut the people out of the process, which is what both sides are doing here at you just do not want us to be involved. well, i disagree.
a balancing act. the government makes investments in the military. and the weapons systems and different things. that are private companies get those contracts. private employees. it is government spending but they are not government workers. at transportation in which we need to make a ton of investments. we have 100,000 bridges in the united states at would qualify for medicare. we need to rebuild the united states of america. contractors, private workers, who are out there doing the job. are investments we have to make. we have to break loose of a very narrow interpretation. think yourly, i opinion and the way you are framing this, is why we are having problems right now. we have a narrative in the united date that every the government does is bad.
there are no good investments that the government can make. that is moving away from the recipe that made america strong post-world war ii. we invested in our gis with the g.i. bill, eisenhower built the interstate highway, we started investing in nasa, which a lot of private companies benefited from and spun out a number of great technologies that have helped transform our country, because of the public investment. basic research that one company cannot do alone, whether it is semiconductors or manufacturing or whatever the case may be. one company cannot do that on their own. those are wise investments that society,alth in our expand opportunity, and allow our economy to grow for the middle-class. it is a wise approach. we cannot govern by bumper stickers. i know it is in vogue to lob bombs and washington, d.c. and say everything is their fault. are going to get
d.c. to work again is if you get out of the narrative that somehow everything the government does is that. we have got to come back to the balanced approach. go back to the clinton budget. 21 million new jobs were created. saw anncome group increase in wages. we invested in newt gingrich. house, wer of the invested in. children's health care, immunizations, and that is back when we had a common philosophy on how to make the economy grow and we created 21 million new jobs. contrast that with the bush administration. come in and implement a hard and rigid supply-side economic theory, cut taxes for the top one percent, hope things trickle down. go by thee surpluses wayside. we saw stagnant economic growth for almost a decade and the deregulation and the lack of investment. we saw the complete collapse of the economy,
including the auto industry in 2008. those are stark comparison there of which way we need to go. i think we need to go back to the clinton model. tim ryan, according to documents on the budget, part of thebudget is built on assumption of the passage of comprehensive immigration reform. is that a strategy? guest: maybe not this year but in the long term, it is important for us not only to try to pass that, but show the american people and businesses across the country that this is one of how we grow the economy and it has got to be front and center. we want to make sure it is and then we utilize those benefits we will get from comprehensive immigration reform. >> he said not right away. do not see it happening this year. i do not see how speak with -- speakers and republicans can get out of their own caucus. i know the judge was trying to
put a small group together. it is very difficult. bush and karl rove had a plan of how to help republicans pull some of the latino vote and do immigration reform. a solid demographic and i think it was a smart move on their part. they got the same blowback from the right wing a lot of members are getting now from the republican side. janet from west virginia, republican line, go ahead. youer: i cannot see democrats doing anything but destroy the middle class people. guest: why would we want to do that? caller: you tell me. guest: you are the one who made the accusation. enlighten me. caller: it was like the guy on their drilling. he tried to talk to obama. [indiscernible] they are killing birds left and
right. [indiscernible] on the republicans -- [indiscernible] you are not getting work. you are trying to keep people in poverty. guest: that is just an i orgeous accusation that anyone else here would have some interest in keeping people locked into poverty. i would suggest you could probably go online and see this graph and go to the house and pull itebsite up. look at the job creation under george bush and under president clinton and president obama, it has been significantly better than under george w. bush. those are facts. they are facts we all share throughout the country. based on economic data. to turn around and just say
maybe because you do not like democrats for some reason, you are trying to blame us for keeping people locked in poverty, just look at the republican budget and look at the cuts made in the republican budget. plus below the sequester level in non-defense spending. huge cuts to programs that would help lift people out of poverty and get them an opportunity to climb themselves back into the middle class, like the pell grants. if you're going to school part-time and work your way up and try to get a college degree so you can improve the life or your family and the republican budget says, if you only go part time, you do not qualify for the grants, and if you take out a student loan you will have to pay the interest back while still in school and you turn around and say democrats do not want to help people climb out of the poverty -- we have got to get away from lobbying accusations at each other. i do not think anyone in d.c. wants anyone to be locked in poverty. we want to help people work
their way out of it. it takes strategic investments on our side and hard work and discipline and mental toughness and resiliency on the individual side. when those to come together, that is how you rebuild the middle class. these accusations are not very helpful. >> paul ryan last week talked about his budget and they put it to thempared administration. i want to get your comments on it. the american people a responsible, balanced budget. a balanced budget will expand opportunity by creating jobs and by supporting our military, it will help keep our countries they. the president posses budget, it never balances, ever. hand,dget, on the other balances in 10 years. it puts us on the path to paying off our debt so our children and grandchildren inherit a debt-free future. first, stop spending money we do not have.
we cut waste and make much-needed reforms to save $5.1 trillion over the next 10 years. our critics may call this steep, but look at it this way. federalurrent path, the government will spend roughly $48 trillion over the next 10 years. by contrast, this budget will spend nearly $43 trillion. on the current path, spending will grow on average 5.2% a year and under our budget, spending will grow 3.5% a year. $43 trillion is enough. increasing spending by 3.5% instead of 5.2% is hardly cervone and. -- draconian. guest: there is a shell game going on here. the budget repeals obamacare. but it includes the revenue raised by obamacare. to the tune of almost one
chilean dollars. you want to talk about a shell game, it also takes in the medicare cuts and medicare advantage and other things that republicans used quite to clubully in 2010 democrats over the head and win the house back. they used those cuts in their budget. this has been an interesting play to watch unfold here but the reality is you cannot repeal theacare and then keep revenues raised for obama care and then turn around and say, we balanced the budget in the next 10 years. if they do another vote on the obamacare,at repeals there will be immediately almost a $1 trillion hole in their budget. line, northmocrats carolina. caller: hello. i was in detroit and i had to
move down here to north carolina to move in with my mother , like representative, what's your name from ohio? guest: ryan. caller: you make a lot of sense. the japanese have a saying, do not fix the blame, fix the problem. we have to ask ourselves as american, what type of country do we want to live in. if you look at the -- the poorest company -- poorest countries, like ethiopia, they andpeople with high houses then you look down on a sea of poverty. as americans, we have to pull together for a common goal. the infrastructure idea is fantastic. fixing and we have americans out of work and it would increase the economy. just one idea.
energy independence would be another. up, the price of gas goes all the trucks that carry goods and services and foods go up as well. more onto concentrate as well asciency expanding solar, wind power. it will take a combination of things. >> i agree. the all of the above strategy for a lot of different things. this is not new. it is not brain surgery. we have done this before and we have figured it out. when you look and see what the chinese, for example, are putting into renewable energy, and energy research, they are putting $15 billion more a year than we are. when you see these clean, green jobs are high manufacturing, about 25% of them, of the jobs, our manufacturing jobs, and they are heavily concentrated in
exports when the rest of the economy is about nine percent manufacturing jobs, those are key strategic investments we need to make peer the department of energy needs to play a role in that. we should work together making sure those investments are strategic and create value in the economy and create wealth and the economy. is not out of the mainstream. it just makes sense because not one company is going to be able to foot the bridge and of making all of those investments. you are right. you do the transportation infrastructure piece. you do the manufacturing three-dimensional printing piece ,nd get printers in our schools and you also continue to do the research and development in biotech. these are the national science foundation, the strategic investments we make. get them down into the schools gettingso kids are
excited about going to school and creating a new economy again. there is none of that in the republican budget. no vision at all. prospects frome the republican side was allowing for the export of u.s. crude oil. where do you stand on that? are doing it now. energy will be huge. my focus has been on the exportation of liquid natural gas. i think that is really something into addressing climate issues around the world, making sure it is a cleaner bird -- burning fuel, of the create jobs in the united states. europe gets about one third of its natural gas from russia and about half of it is natural gas in the ukraine. is a robust exportation program of natural gas in the
united states. it will help us solve some of the geopolitical issues. topic usually goes hand-in-hand with fracking. any concerns? guest: we have not had problems with fracking in ohio. we are excited about opportunities. a risk of any kind of extraction from any resource on we have got to hold people accountable. we are interested in moving the needle on climate change, there will have to be a transition. upwill not be putting windmills all over the country tomorrow and we will not have solar panels to scale tomorrow. if you look at the technologies that have come in in the energy sector, it usually takes a decade or two.
have ae have got to robust energy policy promoting natural gas. fromre is david beltsville, maryland, on our independent line. caller: good morning. mr. ryan, you hit the nail on the head with health care in the state of maryland. i have seen a lot of waste. i would not necessarily call it child abuse, but i would call it waste because of the culture. as you may be aware, maryland is a state that has expanded its health care quite a while ago. i have two questions for you. one, the american public thus far generally has only been bombarded with the part of the affordable care act where it says they have to pretty much be forced to buy insurance.
what they have not really heard is how not only the health-care care industry will be accountable but how individual and efficient areas will be held accountable and making sure they used benefit wisely. when is the media and the democratic party or whoever in government going to propagate that message? question is, what will be done to protect the relative value of medical services? you have private insurance companies managing government plans and there is a lot of speculation on what the law says and where in the affordable care help to control what these private insurance companies can do with relative values to medical services. we have already seen examples in maryland where some insurance companies have tried to seriously deflate -- host: caller, thanks.
guest: this will be a work in progress. as the affordable care act is the ground, we will need to monitor what is happening and deflate costs and whatnot. we will have to look at it very closely and have mechanisms in place and make sure mechanisms we have put in place through the affordable care act do what they were intended to do. something they just roll out and let it go and let the topspin. you have to keep your eye on it and make sure democrats and republicans are able to monitor things. host: next up, new mexico, republican line. caller: good morning, i hope everybody is doing well. a lot of this is just nonsense. i was watching a brian lamb production a couple of years ago. on and sheyoung lady was talking about her book.
if you want to know what is going on in washington today, you have got progressive democrats and progressive republicans. they are socialist communists. there is your fusible evidence -- and the common core program for schools has been completely written by socialists. you have easy to any manual that basically wrote the health care plan, obama care. the guy is a communist socialist. if you want to understand all of this happening, these people out there, democrats and republicans who consider themselves progressives, nine members of the congressional black caucus extolled the virtues of the communist system in cuba. it is nonsense the guy has to actually rationed toilet paper. they do that in brazil and argentina.
communists cannot control society. when you take money out of the federal government out of the business hands and private business hands, you put it into government and most of it is wasted. that is the nature of government. want to solve this stuff, barack obama has been studying the keystone pipeline for five years now. it was being studied before he got in there. it would immediately create tens of houses, hundreds of thousands of brand-new jobs. high-paying jobs. host: thanks, caller. again, calling names i do not think is appropriate. i think we all believe in the free enterprise system. it is a magical system that yields great benefits and creates a great amount of efficiency in our markets but it is not perfect and has rough edges that need to get knocked off. that is where we come together collectively to try to knock off
the inhumane edges of the capitalistic system there that is why we have medicare and medicaid and health care for the poor and elderly. that is why we have certain that make sure there is a safety net in place. those are not communist ideas. the united states has one of the in the world in business, still, from around the world. they come to the united states because they can thrive here in our free enterprise system. concerns are your as valid as you say they are. people are still coming here and making investments and wanting to do business in the united states. as for the quarter -- the affordable care act, you will the because it sounds like of and paying attention for long time, the affordable care act today was the republican plan offered way back when in 1993 when hillary clinton
was trying to do health care. this is the republican model, the individual mandate, the markets, the exchanges. all of these things came out of the heritage foundation. i just think it is important for us to recognize there is no can -- no conspiracy here of communist takeover. it is just a different philosophy. no one thinks the government should come takeover businesses but for certain exceptions where the auto industry was going to collapse, for example, and we are getting ourselves out of that now and the auto industry is moving forward and making that quite successful except for the extreme circumstances. i just think the name-calling, again, is not helpful. qwest is the affordable air -- care act going to be helpful in the election? yes.: a lot of republicans will run on it, especially those in the primaries who hate it more.
in georgia, they are staging phone call from the president to say, i will not take your call on the affordable care act. it will obviously be an issue. democrats need to get men and women and children who have benefited from the affordable care act and put them front and center. those who could not get care now can't. those who have some issue or month. are paying $60 a sentetter some republican to the president that he was sharing with everybody a couple of weeks ago saying this was not a democrat or republican issue, i was not sick, i could not get health care and now i can and obamacare works. host: adam from michigan, independent line. i'm a little nervous. [indiscernible]
and the subsidies that go with it. in particular, the food stamp program. [indiscernible] the food stamps happen to cover that when you go to the grocery store. i have personally seen an example where children are being coerced to drink is unhealthy beverage for basically the bottle deposit return. some regarding this. i was wondering what you are feeling about this and if the government really should be subsidizing something such as deposits. it speaks to a broader point. i am not completely familiar with the michigan program. i think we have got to recognize
as a country, and we can get the numbers state-by-state, this diabetes epidemic we are having that i mentioned earlier, half the country, half the population of the united ace will either have diabetes or prediabetes. -- the costs are unsustainable for us to move forward as a country and not try to address the issue. we need to address it on all fronts, including our food system. we are subsidizing and where the subsidy goes and who it goes to and what we are incentivizing the production of and the we are seeing a lot of this food that has grown is not really food. it goes to feed and it goes to a variety of different things that end up in very processed foods. making investments and sustainable regional farms, whole foods and fresh foods and
make those affordable and vessel and the medicaid and foods and sent other programs really sit how we'reigure out going to create healthy diets for folks to learn how to grow regionalood with a garden, how to grow good healthy food, how to cook healthy food, and how to eat healthy food, and how to shop healthy food and make those whose affordable for average people. that speaks to the point, ultimately, of not having to do with the high cost of medical in the next few years because of the diabetes epidemic we have. tim ryan, democrat of ohio, a member of the budget and appropriations mitty. thank you for your time. coming up, we will hear from another member of congress, the senator of wyoming, the republican of that state. later in the program, the obama administration's approach to
deportation. first up, we will get a news update from c-span radio. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2014] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] >> that democrats in congress -- making a concerted effort aimed at closing a composition gender gap aimed at men. today, the president signed an executive order from retaliating against workers who discuss their pay. he will also direct the labor department to issue new rules are hiring federal contractors to provide race and gender, and nation data. the senate plans to take up legislation that would make it easier for workers to sue companies for paying women less than men because of gender. the senate meets today at 10:00 p.m. eastern time. live coverage on c-span two. the house also begin at 10:00
eastern. appropriations and budget hearings continue. cq writes this morning that thanks to a situation in the ukraine, the secretary positive appearance essentially to discuss the budget could be decidedly less friendly than the armor committed chairman might expect under other circumstances. john mccain released a statement by pro-russian demonstrators, actions he called straight out of president clinton's playbook. he criticized the obama administration for not meeting modest military assistance and said president clinton would interpret it as a sign of weakness. iran made the ofnt is well with menendez new jersey regarding enforcement of the iranian stations --
sanctions. in here that's on c-span radio or watch it live on c-span three. those are some of the latest headlines on c-span radio. >> i think what we need is something akin to the grace commission of the reagan administration or the base realignment and closing commission. thatde group of integrity come in and do a complete audit of government from top to bottom. government has a piece of legislation or charter that created it. it has a purpose. if it is not fulfilling the within ar not doing it reasonable budget, it should be cut or eliminated. headstart came in with the highest motivation. there are now three headstart. there is early head start on
enhanced headstart, and regular headstart. hy do we have the other two? the first phone was not working. >> cal thomas on fixing a broken washington. immediately following afterwards, a heritage >>foundation -- as he signs his book and chats with guest. also, this year's national black writers conference saturday at noon eastern with literature and shipping and that even africa, and sunday at two, tessa 2:00 -- sunday at 2:00. host: senate -- senator john barrasso joins us.
good morning. talk a little bit about the vote and how did you vote on it? guest: extending unemployment long-term has been impacts. i am concerned about people chronically out of work. i voted against this proposal because we had amendments to try to get people back to work. is out of work get 26 weeks of unemployment insurance while they are out there looking her work. because of the financial downturn, they added an emergency extension. this is the 14th effort to extend that. we ought to focus on getting people back to work at home. there are a lot of things we can do with that. to improve the keystone xl pipeline. it would create 42,000 new jobs.
the last guest talked about exporting natural gas. to the ukraine, where there is a crisis going on right now, to europe. anotherings will create 40,000 jobs. i want to get people back to work. hurt.alth care law has the 30 hour work week is how they define full-time work. a republican working with a democrat have cosponsored legislation to say, let's raise that from 30 to 40 hours so more take-home pay. those are ways to help the quality of life of american citizens. --s missed an opportunity to to make sure people are fully
trained so they can go back and find productive employment. to me, it is all about a job. as a doctor taking care of people who have been long-term unemployed, people tie the idea of their job a lot of times to their identity and dignity and self-esteem. the more we can do to get people working, the better it is. on the house side, maybe more job creation tactics were added as well your quest he had an opportunity yesterday that harry reid unfortunately blocked. ithad votes on these and would have given the house more incentive to want to pass this if we had those job creating components tied into this. the president came and told me to my face when i specifically asked him about keystone about a year ago, he said he would have decided by the end of the country would know by the end of 2013. we are into 2014. have had five different
environmental studies, all of which say the impact environmentally is negligible. the state department says there are jobs there. it is all on the president posses desk and that is where the buck stops. that is still not committed to this, which we know is important for energy security and our nation at a time when it is much better to work on american energy than 10 money overseas to people who may not mess fairly be our friends and it would be important for our own energy security as well as our own economic security to the independent more on american supplies. what would it exactly do? >> the reason it goes to the white house is it crosses the border between canada and the united states. we need the approval to build a pipeline to build -- bring canadian oil down to the united states and bring it down by pipeline. a lot of it will be shipped right now by trains. there are different components
and issues at stake. in terms of the construction of our pipeline, the energy producers support this and consumers support it. people wanting to get back to work support it. >> a couple of things are happening today. the senator will take the senate floor today to talk about gender and pay. what do you think about those efforts? every day in america should be a day of equal pay where men and women get paid the same for doing the same job. president said when he signed one of his first pieces of legislation in 2009, that that was the case. as a result of signing that legislation. it was interesting. you have the new york times in front of you. today, obamatory posses own payroll draws scrutiny. his own payroll faces scrutiny.
we asked about that at the white house yesterday specifically it should not be one day that is equal pay. everyday ought to be equal payday. host: there is our graph our guest references. what do you think about the executivedoing orders, especially when it comes to these? >> i hear about this repeatedly in wyoming. there is a lot of concern about the president going over the head of congress and the head of the elected representatives, not just on this issue. we have seen it with the health care law several dozen times, deciding which component of the law he wanted to enforce and which he does not appear people at home say, does he have the authority to do this. there are some lawsuits pending ont will go to the courts the president's use of executive
actions. all presidents have done so. when you pass a piece of legislation as long -- large as the health care law and doctors and hospitals and nurses and patients are figuring out what it means and businesses are trying to comply with the law, and it changes so frequently, it continues to add to the confusion and unpopularity of them law. >> the center of wyoming, our guestuse. if you want to asking questions, here are the numbers -- our first call is eric from texas. the democrats line. good morning. against energy independence, against low prices at the pump. selling 32 million dollars of gasoline in foreign countries everyday. you are against inter-independence, against low prices at the pump.
40 million gallons of diesel to foreign countries everyday. the reason diesel is more extensive than gas because filthy rich corporate executives fell six percent of the gasoline produced to foreign companies -- countries and 25% to foreign countries. they're getting screwed big-time by filthy rich torpor it executives. we do not export any energy. only filthy rich is force. important to use our resources we have now in terms of geopolitics and what is happening with russia. russia, using its domination of energy to hold the ukraine hostage and hold euro cost is right now, with the ukraine, i was there two weeks ago. we seek luby's troops on the border with the ukraine with
more disorder and disturbances yesterday. since the ukraine is being held hostage, nato allies are being held hostage, i agree with the former speaker and the democrat of ohio here on the show that we ought to be exporting our liquefied natural gas. we can use it to help our balance of payment and it will help our allies by undercutting russia posses ability to use energy as a weapon against us. so much of their money comes from selling energy. half of the russian income comes as you from gas. texas and me from miami, those are energy producing states. in wyoming, these are the three e's. we need to have energy security for our nation, economic growth, withood jobs that come
energy, that would come from building the keystone pipeline, buy more of exploration. we need more permits to his word for energy, and i will tell you wyoming is still the place people from all around the world want to come to because of its natural beauty and they do it because we explore from energy in the environmentally sensitive ways in ways that show we are good stewards of environment. host: calling about the time it takes to get these things developed. in the new york times, about a half-dozen bills introduced in congress can cost 7 billion in just the explored. process. to really fully build what is needed to export liquefied natural gas and get the balance to help us significantly takes long-term commitment. it takes time and money.
these are good jobs and we have seen the ability to create good jobs in america and get people back to work, as well as the economist in this article said. we could be bringing back tankers full of dollars for america. host: if you did ask for them, it would undercut russia's export on them? guest: anything you export. we have such an abundance of natural gas due to the technology changes with isizontal drilling, there such an abundance that in north dakota, they are flaring it off and burning it instead of capturing and selling it. we know there is already market overseas for it. japan is interested. there are places all around the world that one hour natural gas. there is a ready market worldwide. any of that will lower the costs are -- or the price that russia is able to charge to european
allies as well as the ukraine. host: on the republican line, good morning. caller: you have a long fight ahead of you because socialist democrats and our socialist president will do everything they can to not only fight you on this fun but every front. the complete lust for absolute power is unending. you can see by the way they try to pass all these regulations to kill the oil industry and destroy the natural gas industry, to destroy coal. they can help their crony friends and their so-called green energy sectors that have no way of covering the whole country or supplying the power for all of our needs. just pay them back for their support and make sure the only ones that have the energy are they themselves. hard fight. a long,
i pray to god you succeed and that we get rid of these people. socialistant is a police skate. people like you are the only ones standing in the way. thank you. you mentioned coal. it continues to be the most affordable, reliable source of energy in the country. the saudi arabia of coal, we have enough to power our country for the next couple of hundred years. in terms of what the administration is doing with its regulations, there is a war on coal. we have nominees coming to congress today at 10:00 at a hearing for a nominee to take over a part of the epa and we will have a number of questions related to the war on coal and the regulations, which are nearly impossible to abide by, the technology does not even exist to get to what are the demands of the administration.
it is interesting because some of the environmental extremists believe one coal-fired power plant equals one windmill. we need all the sources of energy, the renewable energy but also the oil, coal, gas am i rainy him for nuclear power, we need all. if you look into how much wind power and wind turbines you need to replace one power plant that sits on 150 acres, you would need about 300 square miles of equal onenes to coal-fired power plant. the wind is not always blow in the stock is not always shine. need sometely always baseline power source, whether natural gas or coal. power america, we need all these sources of energy. we cannot ask lewd one or the other for political purposes, which is what this administration wants to do. host: in all of the above
strategy, do you hold to that idea? means to me all different sources of energy as opposed to just what is on the ground, wind and solar. you need to get below the ground, as well. ronald joins us, independent line. caller: [indiscernible] to sheila, go alabama, democrats line. caller: good morning. i have two statements. senator washe talking about he did not vote for the unemployment benefits. he has got his bill therefore jobs. in the fine, but meantime, what are the people going to do in the meantime? why not vote for the unemployment in the meantime? what are they going to do? talking about the
president is going over the congress head, the executive. what is congress doing? all they are doing is having meeting after meeting. how much is this costing the taxpayers for these meetings? those are my two comments. what i was saying was they should just marry those two together, pass them at the same time. you are right, it takes a while to get those jobs going. there is no reason to not start on that today if we are needing to extend unemployment benefits for people. at the same time, we also have .hese other jobs in place i believe people who want to work are looking for work. if they could be in the training programs or starting some of those jobs to help them get onto a payroll, will which is where they would really prefer to be. meetings we made
reference to, there is a lot going on in bipartisan and we continue to work on issues but there is a lot to be done. specifically what is happening now with putin and russia and the ukraine, they are issues affecting everyone. we are spending a lot of time discussing what the best way is to handle that situation. five years ago this weekend, the president was overseas and gave a talk about nuclear weapons and removing them from the face of the earth. here we are five days later. north korea is still testing nuclear weapons, iran is still enriching and developing nuclear weapons, and what i see russia doing is still cheating on the strategic reduction talk agreement they made. there is a lot of discussion going on how to deal with all of these issues.
host: you are a member of the foreign relations committee's. . what will the discussions the about? the epa will be back and forth talking about the budget and state department for the next year but we will get into some of the other issues about what is happening around the world. he is just back from the middle east with everts from peace talks and we will talk about what is happening with syria. that has been a discussion point as well as what is happening with russia. and the aggression we see from putin on this point. host: from the wall street journal, he says the secretary of state -- is that something you would support? guest: i voted against the effort to do a strike against syria when that was a discussion point less the timbre. the president asked congress to give their opinion on that.
the travesty continues in syria. secretary kerry strengthened assad causes hand there when they do with the chemical weapons and a president drawing the redline. the may brought the russians and -- in. i thought that was not done the way it should have best been done so we are in a difficult situation now. >> the latest in the ukraine, what does that suggest to you about the role of russia in all of this? a look atu take putin, he is constantly calculating the credibility of the opposition and seeing what he can get away with without having to pay much of a price. we should be doing much more with sanctions specifically affecting his ability to trade oil. we have to use the world banking system to do that.
he has, because of his own home, become aggressive internationally. that increased his popularity at home. i hope he does not believe his own press reports. that could lead to additional unwanted activity. i've been to that area a couple of weeks ago. we have had a bipartisan route standing united. conservatives and liberals from across the spectrum of the senate to be with the new president of the ukraine, the new prime minister, to say we are the people of ukraine. i will head back to that region again with senator mccain next week. there are concerns in that whole area, the entire southern area of the ukraine is a concern. we were there when the helicopters landed just north of the ukraine. this is about energy and the russia efforts and abilities to sell their oil and gas to
customers and use it as a carrot orweapon as a a stick. they use it as a carrot in some countries and they are using it as a stick now in the ukraine. >> our republican line. caller: i have been a listener for years and i truly miss the program you had when you had one side and the other side talking at the table at the same time. say to the to fortor is lowering prices natural gas would be of great benefit to the citizens in this country, instead of planning on shipping it to the ukraine, which you know would require special ports and all kinds of special things to be made before we could even do that, that would take many years. i happened to watch a hearing in regards to that.
year -- thishis month, was 530 seven dollars. i would appreciate some of that to come to our country instead of planning on how to undermine what is going on in the ukraine and russia discussions. i happened to be a russian american citizen contributing to the party of which i am very disappointed in. i was in russia about a month ago. mccain insult the country by saying it is not a country but only a gas station posing as a country. i find that to be very offensive. >> we will let our guest respond. guest: thank you. one of the issues is the price of natural gas goes so low, they stopped drilling and exploring for it because of the cost of
having people out there doing that work. what we know is exporting liquefied natural gas is not likely to raise prices at home but is more likely to have more people at work in the united states so we can produce more natural gas and then ship that and sell it overseas. of the exports have testified at the hearings i have been to and say the impact of the cost of home would be negligible but there are new jobs to explore for additional sources of natural gas, which we would then sell overseas. , good morning. republican line. tennessee. caller: you talk about jobs. the unemployment benefits. tax thesident clinton north american free trade agreement, he said if it did not work, we had to pull out of it. it costs 44,000 manufacturing
jobs. 22 million americans lost their jobs. it didn't work around here in northeast tennessee. industry making furniture. all of our garments industries are gone. we made appliances and electronics and all these jobs are gone. and i doletely failed try to any politician get our jobs back and put the rules and regulations act in that protected our american businesses and corporations. guest: in terms of tennessee, i will tell you, talking about jobs and focus on jobs in the economy, everyday, the united , senators from
tennessee, the regulations coming out of this administration, i believe, are making it harder and more expensive for people to create and keep jobs here it is interesting. we had a hearing where a member of the administration said all of these regulations were the economyto because businesses then had to hire people to fill out the paperwork, not realizing the difference between an employer -- an employee who is helping to build more business and get more customers and more money, versus an employee not bringing anything in but filling out paperwork to send to the government. there is a difference and these regulations with this administration, whether it has to do with the health care law and energy and agriculture, big in my state as well, all of anse regulations have detrimental to a healthy and robust economy. >> our guest, a background as an orthopedic surgeon. guest: i practiced in wyoming
for 25 years. i was in the state senate. is wyoming state senate, it a part-time legislation. we need about one month a year, two months next year. everyone works their own job we balance our budget every year and live within our means. bills have to be on a single topic. i think what we did in the wyoming legislature is a model for what we do in congress. recently medicaid expanding by three million, especially under the affordable care act. guest: medicaid has been a system that has been broken for a long time. what i knew in the wyoming legislature is we always felt we could provide health care for folks a lot better than trying to deal with all these medicaid regulations. across-the-board nationally i think only 40% to 50% of doctors that don't see medicaid patients
because reimbursement is so low, and there is a shortage of doctors and nurses and physician assistants across the country. they predict by 2020 there will be a shortage of 90,000 doctors. many primary care, many specialists as well. over 100,000 shortage in nurses. when the president continued in all of his speeches saying we will provide coverage, there is a big difference between coverage and actually care for people. and we are seeing that now with people who are signing up for the health-care law. some who have gotten a medicaid card and some who have gotten on the exchanges are now finding it is still very difficult to find a doctor. if they had a doctor, many times they are not able to keep that dr. under the health-care law and the exchanges. those are some of the issues the president would have been better to focus on and discuss in advance, to actually get people care rather than just providing
his phrase, coverage, which in many cases is empty. host: when you hear the 7.1 million, how did you respond and what goes through your mind? many: that means how people went to sign up on the website. it does not tell us how many people are actually going to pay and pay for the insurance. it sounds like the number maybe 80% are actually paying. number two, the purpose of this was to actually take people who didn't have insurance previously and see that they could get insurance. that is what the president said. i get letters from people and wyoming all the time who had insurance that they like to but -- like, but was not quite good enough for the president's criteria. they said it worked well for them but he said, no, it was not good enough. i've million people have their insurance cancel. i want to know how many people actually -- 5 million people had their insurance canceled. i wonder how many people actually signed up who got a
letter saying their insurance was canceled or the people who the president talked about, getting people who didn't have insurance have insurance. is this going to work in terms of the age and the health of the people that are signing up? administration said they need a really hefty number of people signing up who are healthy individuals, who essentially will be paying for insurance they are never going to need to use, to help cover the cost for other people's care. in that sense, the jury is still away from weighing in on that. host: had your colleagues been told when you will find the breakdown of who paid and which of those have insurance or not? think the administration has not been forthcoming. it is interesting, for a long time they said they could not tell you or they wouldn't tell you. then on the final day they get it down to a decimal point. it is interesting when they decide to release numbers and how forthcoming they are.
but they are the only ones who actually get to see the numbers. but i think what is really key is how many people signed up because they did not have insurance before and now have it versus those who just at the cancellation letter that said, sorry, your insurance is not good enough. i spoke to a ranch in wyoming, she knows i am a doctor and they had a policy that worked for their family but they lost it over many years and they now have a policy that is more expensive and higher deductible. they had to buy it. she said the reason their insurance policy was not good enough is because it did not cover maternity coverage, and she said dr. barrasso, i had a hysterectomy. could you explain to the president i don't need maternity coverage? i think people realized they had policies that work for them canceled, they said they are better to make a judgment about their own family. they did not need congress or president to tell them what is better for them. they feel certainly the people of wyoming are very disappointed
with the way this was forced down the throats of the american people and they can't keep what they had that they liked, even though the president promised them they could. host: would you support repeal or probable -- or changes to the program to make a more efficient? guest: i think you need to replace the health-care law that is in place now to be more patient-centered and give people more flexibility and freedom and choice to make decisions on their own, which is part of the republican jobs plan, which it comes to the health-care law, how you define a full-time employee. weekave a 30 hour work versus the 40 hour work week. i think it is a lot better that we did not have to hurt people's paychecks because of the health-care law. this is the problem with a 2700 page bill, so many unintended consequences. when nancy pelosi said first the have to pass it before you get to find out what is in it. i read the whole thing, but i don't think many members of congress did and i think people
who voted for it did not read it. now you have these components of the law that is actually hurting people's paychecks. it is not just businesses but it is school districts. the whole state of virginia saying for any part-time workers, we will cut them below 30 hours because if you have 30 hours you are considered a full-time worker and they have to pay the expensive health insurance. when a school system says we will have to fire people or cut hours below 30 so we don't pay for insurance, which is too expensive, those are unintended consequences of a law that is too big. i want to get a replacement plan that actually puts people in charge making their decisions, let them shop around across state lines, level the playing field of how people are treated from a tax standpoint. if they buy their insurance personally or get it at work. my wife is a breast cancer survivor. she had three operations, chemotherapy twice. we need to make sure anybody with a pre-existing condition, whether it is diabetes, cancer,
that they can get insured. there are ways to do that. we did it anyway -- in wyoming we did it in a way that was much more efficient. eileen -- host: eileen. clearwater, florida. i want to tell you as an independent i am actually disappointed in both parties. on top of that, we were just talking about the health care. -- first ofmy views all, they are not interpreted either way because both parties are very biased. and there's a lot of finger-pointing and name-calling that it's very unnecessary. what we need is someone who can get -- we need actually a third party that can go in and take the best of both the republicans and democrats. and keep in mind it is we the people who are suffering. we the people. ok? both parties, democrats and
republicans. everything seems to be focused on money, and that's wrong. we need to focus on the people. about a am not sure third party and how well that would work in florida. i will tell you, i am focused on the health care of people as opposed to the coverage of the president's approach. i ran a program in wyoming call the wyoming health fairs, medical director for 25 years, bringing low-cost health screening all around wyoming. thousands and thousands of people show up to learn more about their health. they take personal responsibility. and i think when you put people in charge as opposed to the government in charge, i think it is better for citizens all over the country. host: out to that, pennsylvania. democrats line. caller:. i wanted to ask a question about fracking. -- andsay on tv
commercials about how safe fracking is for america. if it is so safe, why don't we reinstate the clean air and clean water act was -- which was bill by in the 2005 cheney. and all companies have to obey. why should one industry be excluded from the slaw and nobody else is? thank you. guest: fracking has been around for over 60 years. assaults on the practice are found to be untrue. if you take a look at the economy in pennsylvania, where you are, there is a line between pennsylvania and new york and you see the different economically of the two communities on one side or the other of that state line, where jobs and the economy is booming on the one side where they are allowing new technology to be providehelp divide --
much more affordable energy sources and the other side of the state line where it has been prohibited lyrically. the geology is the same in both places, but there is just a line on the map. and the different economically is pronounced than it is because of the fracking and energy production and the jobs related to it. i want to expand it around the country to get americans back to work and to keep us more support -- secure. host: senator schumer and i together with senatorcruz and from texasnator cruz to keep someone from taking to -- the job of iran's ambassador to the united states. guest: it passed yesterday. bipartisan. they say there's not much happening bipartisan but that was a bipartisan effort to keep this a rainy and individual out of the united states. my understanding is this specific individual was involved in holding our americans hostage during the end of
jimmy carter's administration when our embassy was captured. so i think that this was a good catch by senator cruz to see who was appointed and with the efforts were, and a good bipartisan effort by both senator cruz as well as senator schumer to prevent that individual. host: the final vote to show a bipartisan effort? guest: i think there was general agreement among everyone. host: of the next is dave from conway, massachusetts. independent line. caller: good morning. i wanted toitems bring up. one, energy independence, and the other was health care. on the energy independence and , since 2000,enue energy prices have gone up over 300%. and that while we supposedly
have more energy in this country than we have ever had. is feeding into an affecting food prices. the federal government prohibits our -- of ethanol in and i think that is wrong. when it comes to energy like weence, it seems should move to things that are sustainable, like hydrogen, which is the most abundant element on the planet. guest: thank you, david. you wanted to talk about energy as well as health care. ethanol, an interesting key point, unintended on the clinton something. it is affecting food prices. the government said we had to use more and more ethanol in
terms of the blend of how much energy was used. where did they get it from? corn. , when there is a subsidy to produce ethanol, then you need to produce the corn and it drives up the price. what it does additionally to food prices, certainly wyoming, cattle country, corn is used as a feedstock to help mature the beef that we eat in the country. when you see a policy like an ethanol policy, it impacts one part of the food chain and in other parts. it makes you wonder if people thought these things through. i opposed the subsidies for ethanol. i think it has taken us in the wrong direction. host: one more call. ralph from far rockaway, new york. independent line. caller: good morning. quick question. i heard the senator said -- i have some comments actually. i heard the senator saying iran
is still enriching the nuclear weapons. iran don't have a nuclear weapon. about health care, before obama passed this law, it was like jumping sharks because people would be denied coverage. if people had an illness, the insurance company only paid so much and then they cut off. they would go bankrupt. i know veterans who fought for this country collecting cans right now because there insurance run up you should be ashamed of yourself. folks who fought for their country do not get help that you take your tax dollars and ship it overseas to different countries to help different countries. i could never, ever be a republican because the republicans never see a poor person they didn't like. to iran, i regard believe they are continuing to enrich. i believe they are the looking
nuclear weapons. in terms of our veterans -- my father fought in world war ii and i have been to visit our troops many times overseas haired i think every member of congress is very grateful for the men and women of the united states who wear the uniform as well as their families who make continued sacrifices for those who serve. some of the things we have her jobsd as part of come chill -- component of the unemployment insurance bill specifically had to do with veterans and helping veterans get to work, get the training, forthe opportunities and companies who would hire our veterans, that they would actually not the hindered by the additional expenses of the health-care law and the specific mandate of the number of employees and the number of work hours. host: senator john barrasso of wyoming, thank you for your time. coming up in our final segment, we will hear from brian bennett who reports on national security
and immigration for "the los angeles times," and he will talk about the white house's the poor deportation policy when "washington journal" continues. >> i think what we need is something akin to the grace commission during the reagan administration or the brac commission, base realignment and closing a mission i think during the clinton administration. an outside group with integrity.
former members of congress. no current elected all editions, to come in and do a complete audit of government from top to autumn. aery government agency has piece of legislation or charter that created it. it has a purpose. if it is not fulfilling that purpose or not doing it within a reasonable budget, it should be cut or eliminated. let's take headstart. this came in with the highest motivation. do you know -- and i didn't until i researched it -- there are three headstart. early head start, enhanced headstart, and regular headstart. why do we have the other two? because the first one wasn't working. why do we have the third one? the second one was not working. cal thomascolumnist on fixing a broken washington saturday night at 10:00 p.m. eastern and sunday night at 9:00 p.m. and immediately following it a heritage foundation book arty for mr. thomas as he signs his book and checked with the spirit also this week and a booktv, this year's national black writers conference saturday at noon eastern with panels on race, power and
politics, literature, and shifting identities in africa. sunday at 2:00 p.m., strengthening communities, historical -- a historical narrative. otb, every weekend on c-span2. " continues.journal brianjoining us now, bennett from "the los angeles times" national security and immigration correspondent. good morning. when it comes to the deportation policy of the united states, what is the president's goal? guest: when the president came into office he inherited a pretty robust machinery to deport people who have been ramped up at the end of the bush administration. said,eople came in they let's find a way to look at people who have criminal history or pose a threat to public safety and also people who have recently crossed the border. so they made some changes to try
to get some of the immigration agents working inside the country to focus their effort on people with a long criminal rap sheet, for example. and they also tried to expand the program where people apprehended at the border, instead of just being bussed back across the border, they would be put into formal deportation protest the debt proceedings so if those people tried to cross again there would be more serious ramifications for the crossing. those steps were put in place, and they have had mixed results. what the president decided he wanted to do was instead of trying to reduce the number of deportations, to keep the machinery and lace and keep supporting people, but try to focus in certain areas. host: what is the perception of how many people are being supported by the administration and what is the reality of hominid people are being deported? the perception, we are about to near the mark of 2 million deportations under
obama, if we have not passed it already, and the reality is, millionre have been 2 official deportations. but when you look closely at the numbers, you see that the number of people being deported from inside the continental united actually decreased year on year over the last four years. been replaced by more people who are apprehended close to the border with the formal deportation proceedings and the number of people apprehended within 100 miles of the border have gone up year on year. presidentue that this has put a record number of people through deportation proceedings, but when you look closely at the numbers, there's another story to tell about how their resources and the deportation machinery has been focused. host: why is that? the obama administration has made some changes to try to instead oftation --
just having immigration agents deport the first people they find who are here in the country illegally, they try to focus the machinery on people who have multiple immigration violation to recently crossed the border or who have other crimes on their record. immigration and customs enforcement -- and you refer to this -- lucky 13, about 316,000 defined as4,000 interior of the united states, 235,000 along the border, which you reference. what is the difference between a border and a hundred miles out question but why does the policy change so much? guest: i guess the administration decided let's focus on resources -- instead of trying to poor people who have been settled here along time and have deep roots in the country and have u.s. citizens as
children, for example, let's focus resources on people more recently arriving into the united states illegally. hey, wer feeling was, are going to find more of those people actually crossing the border if we put more people down within 100 miles of the border. and for the people we are finding in the interior of the united states, the obama administration decided they would stop work site raids us -- so they would stop having immigration agents showing up at large factories and checking immigration status. a best of those raids were putting a lot of people in deportation proceedings inside the continental u.s.. they decided instead let's focus the efforts on employers who are not properly checking the immigration status of the people they hire. >> if you are ingrained in the country and 100 miles away from the border and you've got a job, a good chance you will not be deported. guest: that is what a lot of the immigration numbers show and
what immigration officials have tried to change. said, there are really horrible and difficult stories of people still being deported who have deep roots in the country, especially people who have multiple immigration violations. it is a felony to reenter the country after being deported once. a number of parents living inside the united states who have been deported and then came back into the country illegally, and they are considered by immigration agents priority for deportation, even if they have deep roots in the country and u.s. citizen children. this is something that the obama administration has considered changing. if you recall him a recently the ofsident asked the new head homeland security jeh johnson to look at changes. one thing they are looking at,
you look at this priority category and maybe take out repeat immigration violations out of the priority category so that some of the situations where we have people with deep roots and family ties inside the united states who were made a priority for deportation, that we could allow them to stay essentially. host: brian bennett from "the los angeles times lowe's quote right on national security and immigration. if you want to find out more about the process, a chance to talk to him -- host: if you are here on the united states illegally and want to give your comments as well, a -3883.or you, 202-58 compared tos policy the previous administration, the bush administration? guest: the bush it ministration towards the end -- president
bush, as you recall, campaigned on the slogan of compassionate conservatism. he tried to pass an immigration reform bill, and when it failed, that was an effort in congress to ramp up of the number of resources on border security. so towards the end of the bush administration, a lot more money was being put into hiring immigration agents and hiring of border patrol. a theorypproach was that law enforcement used: -- called disruption. you don't necessarily focus your resources on the worst offenders, you try to punish everyone you come in contact with. and so what was happening at the end of the bush it ministration was there was a large number of worksite raids. there was a large amount of fear and immigrant community that immigrants here in this country illegally were not sure what
would happen when they came in contact with law enforcement, whether they would be deported or not. and when obama came into office, the people he brought in decided they wanted to take a new look, a fresh look at the policy and agentsfocus immigration on people with criminal records. and that has had mixed success. they moved the numbers and little bit toward deporting people with a long criminal records but not nearly as far as what a lot of people would like to see. host: did the obama administration spend more on top of the previous administration? guest: yes. congress approved a $600 million addition to border security in 2010. and the budgets have increased incrementally year on year to hire more border patrol and more immigration agents. what we've seen, for example, on the border patrol side was border patrol has doubled since the early 2000's.
now in 21,000. there has been a big ramp up in the number of border patrol agent patrolling the border. from our first call is tom garfield, kentucky. independent line. tom, go ahead. go ahead. you will have to stop listening to the tv and just go ahead. reported some immigrants getting off of a buzz around 12:00 at night. host: go ahead. gave the department numbers, gave it to the people. i sat there all night waiting for somebody to come. that is one incident. ok. i reported it several times, about three or four times, actually did nothing was ever done.
host: those whom i deal with it directly. guest: ranchers who have a lot of land on the border, there is a lot of frustration in the community with cartels and immigrants using their land as transit. human smuggling and drug. and a lot of times people crossing leave trash and cause vandalism to the property. --er patrol receives calls border patrol receives calls. it is a really big border and it is hard for borders patrol to respond to every call. host: reno, nevada. mark, up next. independent line. caller: i wonder how much it costs every year to enforce the deportation policy. guest: some organizations have looked at numbers. billion estimate is $18 when you look at every single branch of the federal government
that touches immigration and deportation policy. toit's an expensive endeavor enforce this. another big cost of deportation policy is detention centers. there is a congressional mandate that the immigration and customs enforcement keep 34,000 beds available for obtaining immigrants at any given time. also a very extensive part. host: when someone is detained of the border, what kind of information is taken from them? guest: more than five years ago under the bush administration there was criticism about how people were processed when they were detained at the border. the process was criticized as catch and release, that people would be caught up and essentially returned with very little record. and the obama administration has tried to put more people called
at the border into formal deportation proceedings where they would take their fingerprints, some sort of identifier that they would put into the system. any would take a name and identification they have on them, they would take a record of that. what the fingerprints would do is they would help federal authorities track whether this person has been apprehended before and has a record already. host: here is otis anna republican line. caller: i am calling in regard to the immigration situation. turn down the are television and go ahead with your question or comment. we will come back to you. james from baltimore maryland, democrats line. go ahead. caller: hello. like --lling in
[indiscernible] before we go on, if you are on hold please turn down your television sets so we don't get feedback. there is a lot of frustration and communities and have people inside the country who don't have legal status. one thing we saw in the senate debate was a growing realization that there are 11 million people here without documentation or work permits. the congressional budget office and -- budget office did an economic analysis. if you are able to document them and give them work permits that they can add to the productivity of the company and -- productivity of the country and gdp they would pay for the cost of ringing in more labor.
that is a message that the democrats wanted to build upon when they are o campaigning on immigration. frustration inf the communities that see immigrants come and compete for people -- compete with people for jobs. david, independent line. , i have twott questions, one regarding the border security. i wanted to hear your assessment, if you think it has improved and how it compares to the year 2000. is iner statement contrast to the pbs caller. i don't have a negative feeling towards people who may be in
some kind of limbo as far as immigration goes. that is a good question about how border security has changed. the situation has changed dramatically. it is harder for immigrants to cross over it legally between the points of entry and it has become more expensive. the cartels have really taken over the human smuggling routes. it has also become more dangerous for that reason. and the consequences are higher. it is more likely when someone is caught crossing the border that they are going to be fingerprinted, put in the database, and their deportation will be recorded. if a get caught again they could face jail time. they could have more severe consequences for china across the border multiple times. >> what is the status of the fancy echo >> of -- of the
fence? guest: what the border patrol and dhs like to call it is a virtual fence. in some areas a fence is appropriate. you can build a fence and slow people down from crossing. when you get into some of the remote areas along the border , youare down this region don't need to build a physical fence there. in fact it is wasteful because it is easy for somebody to come and cut it. to also have the ability stop people if they cross over. there has been an effort to put more cameras and sensors in to notify them when groups of people are crossing. that has been difficult to implement. they have struggled with getting those things to work properly.
>> are drones part of the border? >> they are. and customs isol flying them on the southern borders. they are flying with sensors and that contract -- that contract large groups of people going over. >> here's michelle from birmingham, alabama. >> good morning. i had a couple of quick questions. to releases going , finger printing them is not going to do anything anyway. our country is a country of laws, which means we are supposed to abide by the laws. but is the point of view
even having an immigration policy? last question -- last question, if you are a reporter for the new york times, why aren't you writing reports about this? thanks for those comments. first of all i work for the lost angeles times. -- los angeles times. the obama administration decided they wanted to to fingerprint more people so if they caught again -- that they get caught again they have a record and they can put them into criminal proceedings. actually when you look at the figures, the number of people that have been put into criminal proceedings in federal court for immigration violation has gone up dramatically over the last five years. there has been a shift to try to have more consequences for people who violated immigration
laws over the last five years. this was a story on the deportation figures. you can find it online on the los angeles website. guest reports on immigration issues. he talks about the deportation policy set forth by the white house and figures as well when it comes to the deportation policy. you can find it on the l.a. times website, written by our guest brian bennett. we are joined on the republican line. good morning. i would like you to go to the border and write your column once in a while. bordersee you cross the and be a reporter. it is not funny to live in texas anymore and there are more than 24 million coming here daily.
it is getting to be out of hand. we have laws that have always been enforced up until mr. obama came on. thank you very much. you are making a division between people in the united states and people who are coming here illegally. it is causing problems. they can march against our laws and publicly state they are illegal to begin with and nothing is done. that is pretty bad. you don't see them in mexico doing that. in texas the number of border crossings has gone up creative what happened was the border patrol clamped down hard on arizona and the put a lot of resources there.
some of the traffic has moved to texas. if you look at the trend over time over the last five or six years, the number of people trying to get into the united states has gone down slightly year over year. people think it is because of the poor economy. and also it has become more difficult and dangerous to cross. border patrol has seen an increase of people coming in through texas. people have seen an increase in people coming across their land and impacting their daily lives. >> has there been any crossing between the united states and mexico yuck :00 there has been a lot of diplomatic discussion. the u.s. would like to see mexico do more to crack down on the cartels who are engaged in drug and human smuggling on the mexican side of the border. the mexican government have a
number of requests, which is they feel like the relaxed gun laws inside the united states allow guns to be purchased in the united states and brought over to on the cartels. they have been asking the u.s. to make changes on that. u.s.'s little that the government can do without congress. difficult and intense -- intense issue. from washington dc, democrat line. i am an immigrant. i was in immigration detention for over three years. i don't understand why i was in detention for so long.
it seems like immigration wants to detain you for eternity. to -- which is uncalled for. seeing a lot about the way immigration detains people and the ports anybody on any given date. i have kids in the military. why do we have to be detained so long to get some kind of justice? i am here legally. i get caught up in immigration in 2009.
guest: i would be happy to talk to you about this further at the end of this story. a really interesting issue. he says he was held for three years in immigration detention. this is something the courts are looking at right now. there is a case in california where someone was held also for three years in immigration detention for a bond hearing. the court has decided that person needed to have a bond hearing within six months to be provisionswith our in the constitution. that is an interesting development in how immigrants are treated in detention and opens debate as to whether or not immigrants are held for a very long time, whether they should go before judge and
should beif they taken out of the tension and released with an ankle bracelet, make some determination whether they need to be held and actually incarcerated in the time they are fighting their deportation. host: who provides legal counsel? guest: it is difficult to get in touch with a lawyer sometimes. far away they can be from a detention facility. sometimes they can talk only over videoconferencing. it to make immigrants feel like they are not getting adequate representation. up next is arlene from the democrats line. caller: question for you. storyd like you to do a for some of the people you see deported.
i should say the immigration officers -- i know of some individual that is very close to me. they pushed him out of the country without him even -- shing all of his no snob where it is going to go. knows not where it is going to go. i am his mother. i'm very close to that person. he was grown in this country, and even when he went to the immigration court and was explaining he doesn't have the right to be deported because he could be a citizen of this country, the judge did not want to hear it. they need to also pay attention to the judges that sometime you
face. because you are an immigrant they don't want hear what is going on. the immigration courts are overloaded. is an increase in the number of agents doing the work of putting people into detention and into the immigration court system. an increase in to the number of immigration judges. a frustration that immigration judges are not allowed -- because their caseload wants -- their caseload is so big they do not have time to look at each caseload carefully and decide if there is enough equity on their side that would make it reasonable to stay in the united states. >> is there an appeals process? there is an appeals process. it can take many years. it can take up to six years for someone to get through the
entire immigration process. the frustration we have heard from the callers is that someone could be determined that they need to be detained for the time they are going through the appeals process and they can end up serving three years in prison before the case is even decided. host: this is brian bennett from "the los angeles times." sharon from illinois is our next caller on the independent line. caller: i just have a couple of comments. i have not read his article, i look for to reading it. 68,000 -- were set free because we do not have enough detention space. included in that number were people who committed some very heinous crimes. that is one thing i would like you to comment on.
the other is when the gang of eight was working on the immigration bill i watched all the hearings. me why theyus to never wanted to hear from actual border agents. they were not represented at all on any of the panels. i believe people in this country would be highly considerate on both sides of the aisle. if that bill passes then everything would be put into the of dhs, the head department of homeland security. all congress would be giving up their authority to dhs. home see problems within the system and call our congressmen, they act like
there's nothing they can do about it. >> there is a lot of frustration about some of the provisions of was in the senate immigration bill. the house looks unlikely to take enough for a vote. bill would not have created a legalization program for some of the 11 million people that are here without a work permit. it also is required they pay a fine and come forward. it also would increase the number of visas to bring people in the country. the idea would be to reduce the law across the border, if you can create a legal way for workers to come in and fill in some of the jobs here in the united states. there were some frustration about who was brought in to discuss the writing of that bill. representatives felt like they were shut out of the process and
fell like they were the ones who would be implement impartial law and they should have been part of the discussion. >> how much pressure is there on employers to make sure that those that they employee work in this country echo >> they are supposed to check the immigration status of the people they hire. they keep that form for the records in case they are audited by the federal government. employers can sign up for verification. they check federal databases, check the immigration statuses. one of the ideas and some of these bills was that you should make the system mandatory for every employer, mostly large employers. at the moment it is really
difficult to the work of andking immigration status they are only held to account if they receive an audit from the federal government. host: if there is less rage, isn't there less pressure on them? were agentsaids coming in and readying the workplace and checking the status of people. there was also serious ramifications for the workers on the line. now there are more audits of i-9 forms. you have auditors going to large companies and saying to me see your i-9 forms and make sure that the people working for you have given you the proper information. the obama administration want to put more of the pressure on the employer's.
we will hear next from the independent line. i am from california, retired law enforcement. i have a father from callow -- from mexico. we are all born here, my family. this lady from texas things they are going to have an easy fix. is way too late. when my father came over in the 60's, shortly after his whole family came over. our family was flooded. i was a deputy sheriff in the early 80's. we used to arrest people if they will committed -- if they committed a felony nine. we just kicked them loose under title eight. we knew it was already too late. unfortunately if people saw how the mexican nationals were
brought over to do all the dirty work and they have been living like mm -- living like animals takingranches, we start over the traits in california. they are going to keep moving. get used to because it is not going to change. it is going to get worse. this is what we wanted and what we get. one thing the caller is speaking to, there are 11 million people living without proper, -- without proper documentation. most of them have been here for more than 10 years. it is very hard and emotionally wrought to extract these people from the community. that is why the senate and white house have push to come up with some sort of legal fix to the in order to tell his
people to come forward, register with the federal government, and go through a process to get a work permit and be a legal resident of the country. where are we as far as comprehensive immigration reform? guest: a similar bill has been hasoduced in the house that support of almost all the democrats in the house and a handful of republicans, but not enough to bring it to a vote. the question that remains is whether or not john boehner would be willing to bring that bill or some other similar bill to a vote by the end of the year. gain out theo politics of it's a the only chance of the bill would be if a republican party would decide we need to get this issue off the 2016 before the
presidential elections because we are going to need some small fraction of the latino vote in order to get our president elected nationally. optimists think that the at some point will come to that realize asian and pass something by the end of the year. it is looking less and less likely. how much difference between the house and senate bill? guest: the house bill is all most a mirror of the senate bill. the senate bill tacked on an additional $30 billion for security spending. that is not in the house version. it was introduced by democrats and a handful of republicans that were sympathetic to the bill. doesn't represent a large sweeping bipartisan compromise in the way the senate bill does.
tonya is up next from maryland. democrats line area -- line. caller: i'm calling because i'm trying to find out why my children were snatched away from and my identity was switched and they gave my kids to illegal immigrants for money and why no one is doing anything. i can't speak to the specifics of the case. one frustration people have with the immigration system is a lot of criminal elements pray on immigrants and also engage in identity fraud. they produce fake ids and fake driver's licenses for people
force or without proper documentation. brian from pennsylvania, thank you for holding on. guest: the border protection they have up now must a joke. they have motion sensors they can put in, they can even have faked the toys -- fake ecorse course, like flashlights hanging from trees. guest: the border security issue has been a thorn on the side of border patrol. the cartels that are smuggling drugs and people have some very sophisticated -- they have scouting networks. they can identify when border agents are in the area, when
they leave the area, when they can move a shipments through. there have been a lot of efforts to try to find technology that these remote areas and identify when people are moving through. the dhs has launched a big investment into that type of technology. effort was a billion-dollar failure. they have replaced that with a new initiative and they are trying to come up with more solutions to try to find out how camera sensors and drones can help them identify when people are over. caller: i was arrested in 1994
it is a complicated case. this gentleman has deep roots here. he has this immigration violation, which makes them a priority for deportation now. there are immigration lawyers that take a look at your case and see if there is some sort of remedy or appeals process that you can go through in order to try to stay here. this is a category of people because there are so many people that have been here for so long and so many that have been ported already that the obama administration is trying to find a way to humanely look at some of these cases and say here are some cases where someone has the brutes and a family and we need to protect them and not separate them from children and separate those from people who pose a threat to public safety. what about the president's
supporters? how do they respond? a lot of the unions and active groups that support the president when he was elected have fiercely criticized him for his deportation policy. and they want him to change. they wanted to change administration policies to reduce deportations. thank you. we go to the house of representatives. the clerk: the speaker's room, washington, d.c., april 8, 2014. i hereby appoint the honorable rob woodall to act as speaker pro tempore on this day. signed, john a. boehner, speaker of the house of representatives. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the order of the house of january 7, 2014, the chair will now recognize members from lists submitted by the majority and minority leaders for morning hour debate.